I hope they bomb his ass to the stone age.
He's also said that this is another crusade against muslims by the west - he's getting desperate because nobody is sticking their necks out for him.The bastard could have left peacefully and lived in luxury for the rest of his life - oh well , he stayed to be a dictator , now he's gonna face the consequences.

Honestly do you know what bothers me about all this that were too damn holier than thou to just go in and shoot the son of a bitch. We swear up and down oh dear he is not a target we're just enforcing a no fly zone. COME OOOOOOON! Just kill him and save us all a lot of time and money. I don't endorse any of this, but if you're going to do it with or without my blessing then at least make it short and cheap.

Nah, fascism get's thrown around so much that it's lost its meaning. While very reactionary, I don't see them as fascists. This is an internal conflict that should be handled internally. Of course I wouldn't be against arms being sent to the rebels to help defend themselves.

"Liberty without socialism is privilege, injustice; socialism without liberty is slavery and brutality." Mikhail Bakunin

I kind of agree with Sosa. We would never have won our revolution without the assistance of France. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. I also think Obama should have recognized that the War Powers Act does not apply so he should have gotten congressional approval. He could have easily done so. I also think it's likely that we are now going to be compelled to send in ground troops.

I do not think this is an intractable war like Iraq and Afghanistan. As soon as a large scale invasion begins, Quadafi loyalists will drop their pea shooters and go home, and it'll be over. Then Libya can go about setting up their own government on their own terms with NO FURTHER HELP from us. Any insurrection will be theirs to deal with, and none of our concern.

Asked about the circumstances under which a president could bomb Iran, Senator Obama gave an unequivocal answer about the limits of presidential authority generally (h/t Glenn Greenwald via Michael Lind):

"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.

As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action."

However, this is not a situation of self-defense for the US. The U.S. blitz on Libya is aimed at imposing the imperialist order and rolling back the Arab revolutions, not saving lives. The same people who criticized George W. Bush for unleashing the U.S. war machine on Iraq are now cheering Barack Obama's order to pound Libya with missiles and bombs. How do they explain the difference? The Republican Bush's venture was aimed at furthering the interest of U.S. imperial power, we're told, while the Democrat Obama's firepower will save civilian lives and promote democracy.

Tell that to the families of the uncounted civilians who died not at the hands of Libyan government forces, but as a result of U.S. air strikes. While the media highlighted the destruction of tanks and weapons of forces loyal to Qaddafi, bombs dropped from the sky and missiles fired from ships offshore inevitably killed civilians--some of whom may have been supporters of the anti-Qaddafi rebellion.

In fact, U.S. Marines sent to rescue the crew of a crashed F-15 fighter jet reportedly shot six villagers near Benghazi who were trying to help the pilots--and now a boy faces the amputation of his leg as a result of the "rescue."

Military action by the U.S., Britain and France--likely soon to be endorsed by the whole NATO alliance--will likely do little to stop the killings of civilians carried out by Qaddafi's forces. The regime's military and mercenary fighters quickly adjusted to the air strikes by avoiding large concentrations and stepping up their attacks on civilians and rebels in urban areas. Western air power can't be used in those densely populated zones without slaughtering the very people they claim to want to protect.